[Codel] [PATCHv3 4/5] mac80211: implement codel on fair queuing flows

[Johannes Berg]

On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 14:38 +0200, Michal Kazior wrote:
> On 18 April 2016 at 07:31, Michal Kazior <michal.kazior at tieto.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > On 17 April 2016 at 00:29, Johannes Berg <johannes at sipsolutions.net
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2016-04-14 at 14:18 +0200, Michal Kazior wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > +                             struct ieee80211_vif *vif;
> > > > +
> > > > +                             /* When packets are enqueued on
> > > > txq
> > > > it's easy
> > > > +                              * to re-construct the vif
> > > > pointer.
> > > > There's no
> > > > +                              * more space in tx_info so it
> > > > can
> > > > be used to
> > > > +                              * store the necessary enqueue
> > > > time
> > > > for packet
> > > > +                              * sojourn time computation.
> > > > +                              */
> > > > +                             u64 enqueue_time;
> > > > +                     };
> > > I wonder if we could move something like the hw_key into
> > > tx_control
> > > instead?
> > Hmm.. It's probably doable. From a quick look it'll require quite
> > some
> > change here and there (e.g. tdls_channel_switch op will need to be
> > extended to pass tx_control). I'll play with the idea..
> This is actually far more than I thought initially. 

Fair enough. Perhaps it could be done for the vif? But ISTR there were
issues with that when I looked.

We should just get rid of all the rate stuff and convert everything to
use rate tables, but ... :)

> A lot of drivers
> (b43, b43legacy, rtlwifi, wlxxxx, cw1200) access hw_key outside of tx
> op context (tx workers, tx completions). I'm not even sure this is
> safe (keys can be freed in the meantime by mac80211 hence invaliding
> the pointer inside skb, no?).
> 

Hm, yeah, that does seem problematic unless they synchronize against
key removal somehow?

johannes